Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

You can't exactly replace brain cells without forgoing their original neural connections.

The awesome thing about the brain is that, if you were to put new brain cells on/in (whatever the word is) the brain the existing cells and the new cells would create new neural pathways.While I don't see this used as a way to replace a brain that had large chunks of it damaged, it can be used as a long time therapy to keep the brain happy and healthy.

I'm guessing that by the end of this century, if we don't blow ourselves up, we'll have enough understanding of biology, medicine, robotics, etc to extend our lives to hundreds of years instead of only decades. By then, hopefully, we'll have the capability to travel within the inner solar system so we don't have a huge population problem.

The awesome thing about the brain is that, if you were to put new brain cells on/in (whatever the word is) the brain the existing cells and the new cells would create new neural pathways.While I don't see this used as a way to replace a brain that had large chunks of it damaged, it can be used as a long time therapy to keep the brain happy and healthy.

That line is disturbing me. I seriously hope you are not talking about this.

Quote:

I'm guessing that by the end of this century, if we don't blow ourselves up, we'll have enough understanding of biology, medicine, robotics, etc to extend our lives to hundreds of years instead of only decades. By then, hopefully, we'll have the capability to travel within the inner solar system so we don't have a huge population problem.

I want a reverse aging medicine so I can be part of a colonisation fleet. 1-10 male-female ratio and all the females are below the age of 18 - *gets vaporised by a plasma cannon*

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

I want a reverse aging medicine so I can be part of a colonisation fleet. 1-10 male-female ratio and all the females are below the age of 18 - *gets vaporised by a plasma cannon*

Well, when we consider that much breeding will be needed once the colonisation commences, and men will be needed to do prodigious ... ahem, service, then we'll have to be sure to select female participants for visual attractiveness, in addition to fertility.

Carbon nanotube-based sensors are good at sniffing out all kinds of things, but applying the cylindrical molecules to a substrate has traditionally been a dangerous and unreliable process. Now, researchers at MIT have found a way to avoid the hazardous solvents that are currently used, by compressing commercially available nanotube powders into a pencil lead-shaped material. That allowed them to sketch the material directly onto paper imprinted with gold electrodes (as shown above), then measure the current flowing through the resisting carbon nanotubes -- allowing detection of any gases that stick to the material. It works even if the marks aren't uniform, according to the team, and the tech would open up new avenues to cheaper sensors that would be particularly adroit at detecting rotten fruit or natural gas leaks. For more info, sniff out the video after the break.

"We don’t (yet) have any way to test this, but University of Adelaide applied
mathematicians are suggesting that an extended version of Einstein’s Theory of
Special Relativity also holds true for velocities beyond lightspeed.

One of the main predictions of Special Relativity is that the speed of light is
treated as an absolute cosmic speed limit, the line which can never be crossed;
and even the notorious “faster-than-light neutrino” incident in 2011 has left the
theory intact as one of the most robust in physics.

However, during the speculation that surrounded the neutrino discussion last
year1, the University of Adelaide’s Professor Jim Hill and Dr Barry Cox considered
the question of how the mathematical contradictions posed by a faster-than-light
particle could be aligned with Special Relativity.

Their solution, which Professor Hill discussed with The Register,2 rested on
ignoring the speed of light’s status as an absolute limit, and instead, using the
information where the relative velocity of two observers is infinite.3."

I was certain it was old news, but apparently, they just found it ?
I am certain I read something about this some time ago. This shit is actually scaring me.

EDIT : okay, took the time to do some google :
Diamond / carbon planets are easily explainable (see this) and quoting that article : The unconfirmed planet PSR J1719-1438 b, discovered on August 25, 2011, as well as the planet 55 Cancri e, could be such planets. I read the articles about the planet found last year. 55 Cancri e is the planet the medias are currently talking about.

Bill Nye needs your help! We're writing the President of the United States, asking him to restore the funding cuts to NASA's planetary exploration program. Learn more and write your own letter at: http://planetary.org/SOS

"We don’t (yet) have any way to test this, but University of Adelaide applied
mathematicians are suggesting that an extended version of Einstein’s Theory of
Special Relativity also holds true for velocities beyond lightspeed.

One of the main predictions of Special Relativity is that the speed of light is
treated as an absolute cosmic speed limit, the line which can never be crossed;
and even the notorious “faster-than-light neutrino” incident in 2011 has left the
theory intact as one of the most robust in physics.

However, during the speculation that surrounded the neutrino discussion last
year1, the University of Adelaide’s Professor Jim Hill and Dr Barry Cox considered
the question of how the mathematical contradictions posed by a faster-than-light
particle could be aligned with Special Relativity.

Their solution, which Professor Hill discussed with The Register,2 rested on
ignoring the speed of light’s status as an absolute limit, and instead, using the
information where the relative velocity of two observers is infinite.3."

They seem to be leading in a direction to where it might be possible to break lightspeed (one way or another) in say 50 years? Hopefully less from my point of view. Retirement (assuming I get a job I can retire from) would be nice to go to deep space or at least somewhere in the solar system for sightseeing.

Making the solar system a smaller place might be a way to make Earth even smaller in terms of the things that keep our species fighting itself for millenia. It won't end such things, but it might mitigate some of the resource issues and lead to potental industry (therefor jobs).

(Star Trek being "correct", from a certain point of view, would be very interesting).

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

I think I need someone BESIDES the Register trying to explain the mathematics they're dancing with (off to research).

From what I've read, it's not so much that they're trying to prove that the speed of light can be broken, but rather trying to show what it would be like if it was. The whole thing is more of an exercise in theoretical math than actual physics.

From what I've read, it's not so much that they're trying to prove that the speed of light can be broken, but rather trying to show what it would be like if it was. The whole thing is more of an exercise in theoretical math than actual physics.

By doing this they can sidestep criticism of any findings they come up with because it wouldn't directly challenge Relativity.

I'm sure it's possible that things can travel faster than light, but it's all theoretical until we come up with something that can go faster than a tenth of the speed. To be honest I'd rather see heavier research on creating engines that can generate and harness the kind of power needed for serious space travel to begin with. It's like robotics - we just don't have the energy revolution required for advanced independent mechanisms. We're still very much the equivalent of cavemen who need lightning to get fire.

The star system closest to our own sun hosts a planet with roughly Earth's mass and may harbor other alien worlds as well, a new study reports.

Astronomers detected the alien planet around the sunlike star Alpha Centauri B, which is part of a three-star system just 4.3 light-years away from us. The newfound world is about as massive as Earth, but it's no Earth twin; its heat-blasted surface may be covered with molten rock, researchers said.

The mere existence of the planet, known as Alpha Centauri Bb, suggests that undiscovered worlds may lurk farther away from its star — perhaps in the habitable zone, that just-right range of distances where liquid water can exist.

"Most of the low-mass planets are in systems of two, three to six or seven planets, out to the habitable zone," study co-author Stephane Udry of the Geneva Observatory told reporters Tuesday.

So the discovery "opens really good prospects for detecting planets in the habitable zone in a system that is very close to us," Udry added. "In that sense, this system is a landmark."

Alpha Centauri Bb zips around its star every 3.2 days, orbiting at a distance of just 3.6 million miles (6 million kilometers). For comparison, Earth orbits about 93 million miles, or 150 million km, from the sun.